| Title |
Systemic administration of local anesthetic agents to relieve neuropathic pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003345.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vidya Challapalli, Ivo W Tremont-Lukats, Ewan D McNicol, Joseph Lau, Daniel B Carr |
| Abstract |
Lidocaine, mexiletine, tocainide, and flecainide are local anesthetics which give an analgesic effect when administered orally or parenterally. Early reports described the use of intravenous lidocaine or procaine to relieve cancer and postoperative pain (Keats 1951; Gilbert 1951; De Clive-Lowe 1958; Bartlett 1961). Interest reappeared decades later when patient series and clinical trials reported that parenteral lidocaine and its oral analogs tocainide, mexiletine, and flecainide relieved neuropathic pain in some patients (Boas 1982; Lindblom 1984; Petersen 1986; Dunlop 1988; Bach 1990; Awerbuch 1990). With the recent publication of clinical trials with high quality standards, we have reviewed the use of systemic lidocaine and its oral analogs in neuropathic pain to update our knowledge, to measure their benefit and harm, and to better define their role in therapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 4 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 25% |
| Spain | 2 | 13% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| India | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Colombia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 4 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 273 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 265 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 32 | 12% |
| Other | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 9% |
| Other | 63 | 23% |
| Unknown | 71 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 115 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 7% |
| Psychology | 11 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 32 | 12% |
| Unknown | 76 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#3,452,326
of 23,853,707 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,216
of 12,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,610
of 60,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#22
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,853,707 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,789 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 60,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.